56442 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

that this rule is consistent with these 

priorities and principles. This rule is 

considered a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under the Executive Order, and 

therefore has been reviewed by the 

Office of Management and Budget. 

Since all States should be using a 

‘‘benefiting program’’ cost allocation 

methodology under TANF, we believe 

the impact of this proposed rule is 

minimal. We do not believe the 

proposed policy will have a significant 

negative impact or reduce potential 

Federal reimbursement. Funding for 

TANF is a fixed block grant amount that 

is not affected by the allocation method. 

We welcome comments on our 

analysis and other circumstances that 

could impact on States and urge States 

to consider the interaction of the 

proposed policy on their operations. We 

will carefully consider these comments 

as we finalize the regulations. 

VII. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires 

that a covered agency prepare a 

budgetary impact statement before 

promulgating a rule that includes any 

Federal mandate that may result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and Tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year. 

The Department has determined that 

this rule would not impose a mandate 

that will result in the expenditure by 

State, local, and Tribal governments, in 

the aggregate, or by the private sector, of 

more than $100 million in any one year. 

VIII. Congressional Review 

This regulation is not a major rule as 

defined in 5 U.S.C. Chapter 8. 

IX. Assessment of Federal Regulation 

and Policies on Families 

Section 654 of The Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act of 1999 requires Federal agencies to 

determine whether a proposed policy or 

regulation may affect family well-being. 

If the agency’s determination is 

affirmative, then the agency must 

prepare an impact assessment 

addressing seven criteria specified in 

the law. These regulations will not have 

an impact on family well-being as 

defined in the legislation. 

X. Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132 ‘‘Federalism’’

requires that Federal agencies consult 

with State and local government 

officials in the development of 

regulatory policies with Federalism 

implications. We solicit and welcome 

comments from State and local 

government officials on this proposed 

rule, consistent with Executive Order 

13132. 

List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 263 

Grant programs—Federal aid 

programs, Penalties, Public assistance 

programs—Welfare programs. 

Dated: July 5, 2006. 

Wade F. Horn, 

Assistant Secretary for Children and Families. 

Approved: July 7, 2006. 

Michael O. Leavitt, 

Secretary of Health and Human Services. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Administration for 

Children and Families proposes to 

amend 45 CFR chapter II to read as 

follows: 

PART 263—EXPENDITURES OF STATE 

AND FEDERAL TANF FUNDS 

1. The authority citation for 45 CFR 

part 263 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 604, 607, 609, and 

862a. 

2. Add section 263.14 to subpart B to 

read as follows: 

§ 263.14 What methodology shall a State 

or Territory use to allocate TANF costs? 

A State or Territory shall use a 

benefiting program cost allocation 

methodology consistent with the general 

requirements of OMB Circular A–87 to 

allocate TANF costs. 

[FR Doc. E6–15852 Filed 9–26–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4184–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 64 

[CG Docket No. 03–123; FCC 06–106] 

Telecommunications Relay Services 

and Speech-to-Speech Services for 

Individuals With Hearing and Speech 

Disabilities 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects a 

proposed rule published in the Federal 

Register of September 13, 2006, 

regarding Telecommunications Relay 

Services and Speech-to-Speech Services 

for Individuals with Hearing and 

Speech Disabilities. This correction 

clarifies text that was revised or omitted 

when previously published in the 

Federal Register. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

October 30, 2006. Reply comments are 

due on or before November 13, 2006. 

Written Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

comments on the proposed information 

collection requirements should be 

submitted on or before November 13, 

2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Chandler, Consumer & 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, Disability 

Rights Office at (202) 418–1475 (voice), 

(202) 418–0597 (TTY), or e-mail at 

Thomas.Chandler@fcc.gov. 

Correction 

In proposed rule FR Doc. E6–14901, 

beginning on pages 54009 and 54010 in 

the issue of September 13, 2006, make 

the following corrections: 

1. On page 54009, in the 2nd column, 

correct the ADDRESSES section as 

follows: 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by [CG Docket number 03–

123 and/or FCC Number 06–106], by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web Site: http:// 

www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone (202) 418–0539 or TTY: (202) 

418–0432. 

For detailed instructions for 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. In addition, 

you may submit your PRA comments by 

e-mail or U.S. postal mail. To submit 

your comments by e-mail send them to 

PRA@fcc.gov, and to Allison E. Zaleski, 

OMB Desk Officer, Room 10236 NEOB, 

725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20503, or via the Internet to 

Allison_E._Zaleski@omb.eop.gov, or via 

fax at (202) 395–6466. To submit your 

comments by U.S. postal mail, mark it 

to the attention of Leslie F. Smith, 

Federal Communications Commission, 

445 12th Street, SW., Room 1-C216, 

Washington, DC 20554. 

2. On page 54010, in the 2nd and 3rd 

columns, where it reads Initial 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

Analysis, correct as follows: 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules 56443 

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 Analysis 

The 2006 Cost Recovery FNPRM 

contains proposed information 

collection requirements. The 

Commission, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork burdens, 

invites the general public and the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) to 

comment on the information collection 

requirements contained in this 

document, as required by the PRA of 

1995, Public Law 104–13. Public and 

agency comment are due November 27, 

2006. Comments should address: (a) 

Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Commission, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s 

burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; and (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on the respondents, 

including the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. In addition, 

pursuant to the Small Business 

Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public 

Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506 (c)(4), 

the Commission seeks specific comment 

on how it may ‘‘further reduce the 

information collection burden for small 

business concerns with fewer than 25 

employees.’’

OMB Control Number: 3060–0463. 

Title: Telecommunications Relay 

Services and Speech-to-Speech Services 

for Individuals with Hearing and 

Speech Disabilities, 2006 Cost Recovery 

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 

CG Docket No. 03–123, FCC 06–106. 

Form Number: N/A. 

Type of Review: Revision of currently 

approved collection. 

Number of Respondents: 5,098. 

Number of Responses: 5,285. 

Respondents: Business and other forprofit entities; and State, Local or Tribal 

Government. 

Estimated Time per response: 10 

hours—1,000 hours. 

Frequency of Response: Annual and 

on occasion reporting requirements; 

Recordkeeping; Third party disclosure. 

Total Annual Hourly Burden: 37,757. 

Total Annual Costs: $0.00. 

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No 

impact(s). 

Needs and Uses: On December 21, 

2001, the Commission released the 2001 

TRS Cost Recovery MO&O & FNPRM, In 

the Matter of Telecommunications Relay 

Services for Individuals with Hearing 

and Speech Disabilities, Recommended 

TRS Cost Recovery Guideline, CC 

Docket No. 98–67, FCC 01–371. In the 

2001 TRS Cost Recovery MO&O & 

FNPRM, the Commission directed the 

TRS administrator to continue applying 

the average per minute compensation 

methodology to develop traditional TRS 

compensation rates; required TRS 

providers to submit certain TRS-related 

costs and demand data to TRS Fund 

administrator; and directed the TRS 

administrator to expand the TRS Center 

Data Request, a form for providers to 

itemize their actual and projected cost 

and demand data, to include specific 

sections to capture STS and VRS costs 

and minutes of use. 

On October 25, 2002, the Commission 

released the Fifth Report and Order on 

TRS, In the Matter of 

Telecommunications Services for 

Individuals with Hearing and Speech 

Disabilities, and the Americans with 

Disabilities Act of 1990, CC Docket Nos. 

90–571 & 98–67, FCC 02–269. In the 

Fifth Report and Order on TRS, the 

Commission concluded that carriers 

need not provide coin sent-paid TRS 

calls from payphones because it was 

infeasible to provide coin sent-paid 

relay service through payphones at that 

time, and coin sent-paid functionality 

was not necessary to achieve functional 

equivalence. Further, in the Fifth Report 

and Order on TRS, the Commission 

required TRS providers to submit a onetime report to the Commission, detailing 

the steps taken to comply with the 

consumer education recommendations 

contained in the Fifth Report and Order 

on TRS. The submission of a one-time 

report has been completed, thus the TRS 

providers are no longer required to 

submit a report in compliance of the 

Fifth Report and Order on TRS. 

On July 20, 2006, the Commission 

released a 2006 Cost Recovery FNPRM, 

In the Matter of Telecommunications 

Relay Services and Speech-to-Speech 

Services for Individuals with Hearing 

and Speech Disabilities, CG Docket No. 

03–123, FCC 06–106. The Commission 

seeks comment on a broad range of 

issues concerning the compensation of 

providers of TRS from the Interstate 

TRS Fund (Fund). In the 2006 Cost 

Recovery FNPRM, the Commission seeks 

comment on: (1) Hamilton’s proposed 

‘‘MARS’’ plan and alternative cost 

recovery methodologies for traditional 

TRS, STS and Internet Protocol (IP) 

Relay, including any possible changes to 

the existing TRS Center Data Request 

form; (2) appropriate cost recovery 

methodology for VRS, including 

possible changes to the existing TRS 

Center Data Request form; and (3) the 

basis of ‘‘reasonable’’ costs of providing 

all forms of TRS that should be 

compensable under present cost 

recovery methodology, including 

marketing and outreach expenses, 

overhead costs and executive 

compensation. The 2006 Cost Recovery 

FNPRM proposes a reporting 

requirement that certified state TRS 

programs would be required to submit 

rate data to the Commission, either 

annually or for a multi-year period, for 

their respective intrastate traditional 

TRS and STS services. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 06–8180 Filed 9–26–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 91 

[1018–AU94] 

Revision of Federal Duck Stamp 

Contest Regulations 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service, or we), propose to 

revise the regulations governing the 

annual Migratory Bird Hunting and 

Conservation Stamp Contest [also 

known as the Federal Duck Stamp 

Contest (contest)]. We propose a special 

exemption that would allow recent 

winning artists to submit entries for the 

2007 contest. We also propose to codify 

our longstanding practice of limiting 

judges to only one term. We also 

propose to clarify in our regulations our 

longstanding practice to include artwork 

from the third round of judging in an art 

tour for a year; early return of the 

artwork to the artist will make the artist 

ineligible for the next three (3) contests. 

Finally, we propose to clean up 

grammatical errors in the contest 

procedures. 

DATES: To ensure our consideration, we 

must receive your comments on this 

proposal by October 27, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: For information on 

requirements for submitting or viewing 

comments, see ‘‘Public Comments 

Solicited’’ under SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia Fisher, Chief, Federal Duck 

Stamp Office, (703) 358–2000 (phone), 

duckstamps@fws.gov (e-mail), or (703) 

358–2009 (fax). 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL